You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 2, 2020. It is now read-only.
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Thanks for creating a pull request to contribute to the KiCad libraries! To speed up integration of your PR, please check the following items:
Provide a URL to a datasheet for the footprint(s) you are contributing
An example screenshot image is very helpful
If there are matching symbol or 3D model pull requests, provide link(s) as appropriate
Check the output of the Travis automated check scripts - fix any errors as required
Give a reason behind any intentional library convention rule violation.
Be patient, we maintainers are volunteers with limited time and need to check your contribution against the datasheet. You can speed up the process by providing all the necessary information (see above). And you can speed up the process even more by providing a dimensioned drawing of your contribution. A tutorial on how to do that is found here: https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-check-footprint-correctness/9279 (This is optional!)
I notice SO-20-1EP_7.52x12.825mm_P1.27mm_EP6.045x12.09mm_Mask3.56x4.47mm_ThermalVias has too-small via annular rings, according to our library. Probably the datasheet used shows smaller ones or it just selected arbitrarily. Could you please make any script changes to avoid errors here?
Other than than, everything looks fine and I'll merge.
Why exclude SO-20-1EP_7.52x12.825mm_P1.27mm_EP6.045x12.09mm_Mask3.56x4.47mm_ThermalVias? I can only assume it is in the script if it was updated before.
Of course.
It was introduced in pointhi/kicad-footprint-generator@6793a8d and is not needed until KiCad/kicad-symbols#1733 is merged.
I'm wondering whether this should actually get its MF-specific name (Texas_PowerPad_SO-20...) and if following TI's AN that pedantically is necessary (we don't usually do that and I'm afraid it's not possible without violating KLC).
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Regenerate missed FPs in the wake of pointhi/kicad-footprint-generator#422
Plus OnSemi_VCT, current generator generates differently-chamfered pads.
All contributions to the kicad library must follow the KiCad library convention
Thanks for creating a pull request to contribute to the KiCad libraries! To speed up integration of your PR, please check the following items:
Be patient, we maintainers are volunteers with limited time and need to check your contribution against the datasheet. You can speed up the process by providing all the necessary information (see above). And you can speed up the process even more by providing a dimensioned drawing of your contribution. A tutorial on how to do that is found here: https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-check-footprint-correctness/9279 (This is optional!)